NARENDER KUMAR Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH no lawyer is present on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Gagan Deep, S.R.E.O. is present in person.

(2.) MR . Venkataraman who appears for the petitioners says that the review petition deserves to be dismissed. For this purpose, he has made the following submissions : -

(3.) I have examined the contentions made in the review petition. Based on the documents relied upon by the applicants/ respondents, one cannot reach a conclusion that the records as contended by them had to be retained only for 5 years. The document, Annexure 10, seems to indicate that record weeded out prior to 01.01.2006, had to be stored digitally. The documents pertaining to the writ petitioner appear to fall under category 'X -63', which had storage period of twenty (20) years. In any case the documents filed do not, in the very least, throw any light on this aspect, that is, the category in which the writ petitioner's case would fall. The benefit of doubt, if any, has to go to the petitioner, who is arraigned against the wherewithal of a mighty State. There is, in my view, no error apparent on the face of the record.